Care2 member? Log in

Stop New Pollution and Global Security Threats from Nuclear Waste

Target: United States Senate
Sponsored by: Public Citizen
The US has a serious nuclear waste problem, and like the rest of the world, we have found no solution. Nonetheless, the White House is proposing a giant program to import and reprocess foreign spent fuel. This will increase the amount of highly radioactive waste the US would have to permanently store.

In his current budget, the Bush Administration proposed the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) which would make major changes to U.S. policies regarding the global management of spent nuclear fuel. What this will do is cause more pollution, create an enormous security threat, and be dangerous to communities and neighborhoods.

Demand that your Senators not fund the GNEP and vote no on Bush budget's initiative on nuclear reprocessing.

deadline: 7-11-2007
goal: 20,000
 

Sign Petition!  see who signed this
log in

This petition has been closed.

see more petitions

As your constituent, I am writing to urge you to oppose any funding for reprocessing nuclear waste under the Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative in the FY2007 Energy and Water Appropriations bill. Reprocessing, the separation of uranium and plutonium from irradiated fuel, is an extremely expensive and polluting process that won’t solve our nuclear waste problem. Moreover, it would undermine U.S. nonproliferation efforts.

The $250 million budget request for reprocessing is a part of the proposed Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP), a large, expensive program to promote reprocessing in the United States and in other countries. The House, expressing serious concerns about the proposed GNEP program, cut the budget by more than half to $120 million in its recently passed Energy and Water Appropriations bill. The House report concluded that “the Department of Energy has failed to provide sufficient detailed information to enable Congress to understand fully all aspects of this initiative, including cost, schedule, technology development plan, and waste streams from GNEP.” Without this information, Congress cannot determine whether this program is fiscally sound and in the best interests of U.S. national and energy security.

Commercial reprocessing, in fact, is not a new idea. In fact, more than $40 billion has been spent globally on reprocessing technologies that have never become commercially successful. A 1996 report by the National Academy of Sciences concluded that the costs of reprocessing and transmutation of irradiated fuel from waste produced by existing U.S. reactors alone “easily could be more than $100 billion,” in addition to the cost of a geologic repository.

Reprocessing will not solve our country’s nuclear waste problem, because it will make more waste streams that must be managed and cannot eliminate the need for a geologic repository. The U.S. has not cleaned up the mess from past reprocessing. The only private commercial reprocessing facility in the United States, West Valley in New York, resulted in radioactive waste that is still threatening Lake Erie more than 30 years later and will cost $5.2 billion to clean up. U.S. taxpayers are also on the hook for more than $100 billion to clean up the reprocessing waste at the U.S. nuclear weapons sites that reprocessed to get plutonium for nuclear weapons, as well as reprocessed naval fuel.

Reprocessing would also undermine global nonproliferation efforts. Lack of sufficient fissile material is the primary obstacle keeping non-weapons states and terrorist organizations from creating and using nuclear weapons. Implementing reprocessing would increase the risk that terrorists could obtain plutonium.

I urge you to oppose the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership funding for reprocessing nuclear waste in the FY2007 Energy and Water Appropriations bill.

Sincerely,
/Your Name/
/Your Address/
We signed the “Stop New Pollution and Global Security Threats from Nuclear Waste” petition!
# 20,159:
5:09 pm PDT, Mar 27, Name not displayed, Colorado
# 20,158:
10:34 pm PDT, Mar 18, Shannon Sultan, Wisconsin
# 20,157:
11:47 am PST, Dec 28, Andy Babkes, California
# 20,156:
6:06 am PST, Dec 26, REGINA WIRTH, Germany
# 20,155:
5:57 pm PST, Dec 25, Kathy Harris, Virginia
# 20,154:
8:36 am PST, Nov 9, Roman Soiko, New Jersey
# 20,153:
6:07 am PDT, Nov 3, Holly Swint, Florida
# 20,152:
2:21 am PDT, Oct 30, Haroutioun Goshgarian, Illinois
# 20,151:
11:00 am PDT, Oct 22, Catherine Matte, Switzerland
# 20,150:
3:56 am PDT, Oct 19, Kaytie Irvine, California
# 20,149:
5:17 pm PDT, Oct 12, Jillian Michalek, Florida
# 20,148:
1:48 pm PDT, Sep 20, Shell DiGiorgio, Florida
This is definately not a good thing! Please do the right thing for mankinds sake...thank you
# 20,147:
3:17 am PDT, Sep 4, Juliana Farah, Lebanon
# 20,146:
1:58 am PDT, Aug 12, Allison Holston, California
# 20,145:
10:42 pm PDT, Jul 7, Name not displayed, Connecticut
# 20,144:
10:46 pm PDT, Jul 6, Sara Dorion, Ohio
# 20,143:
11:40 am PDT, Jul 6, Darlene Davis, Michigan
# 20,142:
10:40 am PDT, Jul 4, Catalin Robert Patrasoiu, Romania
# 20,141:
8:04 am PDT, Jul 4, BeMuslim In Pleace, Indonesia
there is only one world, EARTH, why we kill ourselves? beMuslim in Peace! www.bemuslim1.multiply.com
# 20,140:
11:19 am PDT, Jul 3, Lisa Della Terza, Illinois
# 20,139:
8:25 am PDT, Jul 3, Betty Johnson Bender, California
It is insane to think of this as a positive step. Please stop Bush's newest insanity.
# 20,138:
11:11 am PDT, Jul 2, Gamaliel Rivera, New York
# 20,137:
10:22 am PDT, Jul 2, Jeff Miller, California
# 20,136:
9:48 am PDT, Jul 2, Margo Weaver, Kentucky
# 20,135:
9:23 am PDT, Jul 2, Ashley Meyers, Illinois
# 20,134:
9:12 am PDT, Jul 2, Ze Johnson, Wyoming
# 20,133:
9:00 am PDT, Jul 2, Gary Eaton, Iowa
# 20,132:
7:56 am PDT, Jul 2, Amelia Baker, Texas
# 20,131:
6:18 am PDT, Jul 2, Selina Kreiselmeier, United Kingdom
# 20,130:
6:15 am PDT, Jul 2, Deborah Lugo, New York
# 20,129:
3:02 am PDT, Jul 2, Roxanne Warren, Nevada
# 20,128:
10:19 pm PDT, Jul 1, Javier Vargas, Maryland
pollution hurts the animals man
# 20,127:
10:14 pm PDT, Jul 1, Name not displayed, Texas
# 20,126:
9:48 pm PDT, Jul 1, Mayra Rodriguez, Texas
# 20,125:
7:06 pm PDT, Jul 1, Katie Tombesi, Florida
# 20,124:
5:55 pm PDT, Jul 1, RM Merrill, Connecticut
# 20,123:
5:50 pm PDT, Jul 1, Jeff Kamp, Florida
# 20,122:
5:23 pm PDT, Jul 1, Ashley Green, Oregon
# 20,121:
4:57 pm PDT, Jul 1, Amy Cook, Indiana
# 20,120:
4:35 pm PDT, Jul 1, Rebeca Guerra, Tennessee
# 20,119:
3:31 pm PDT, Jul 1, Sara Thurmond, Missouri
# 20,118:
3:27 pm PDT, Jul 1, Neal Jeffries, Florida
# 20,117:
2:46 pm PDT, Jul 1, Teresa Reveal, Utah
# 20,116:
2:07 pm PDT, Jul 1, Linda S, United Kingdom
# 20,115:
1:25 pm PDT, Jul 1, Steven Quilt, Washington
Why have something that pollutes the land? Just like someone said in here before,up the ante' for Solar and Wind power and whatever else that doesnt harm the environment.
# 20,114:
1:00 pm PDT, Jul 1, Amy Janzer, Pennsylvania
# 20,113:
10:26 am PDT, Jul 1, Yvonne Ladd, Michigan
# 20,112:
8:19 am PDT, Jul 1, Brandon Wood, Canada
# 20,111:
5:40 am PDT, Jul 1, Elsie Hobbins, Pennsylvania
# 20,110:
4:56 am PDT, Jul 1, Barbara Zamudio, Florida
# 20,109:
2:41 am PDT, Jul 1, Ingrida Baibokaite, Netherlands
# 20,108:
10:03 pm PDT, Jun 30, Candace Reed, Florida
# 20,107:
8:02 pm PDT, Jun 30, Name not displayed, Virginia
# 20,106:
7:34 pm PDT, Jun 30, Raven Tusing, Virginia
# 20,105:
7:20 pm PDT, Jun 30, Michelle Pena, Florida
# 20,104:
6:44 pm PDT, Jun 30, Brittaney Giatrelis, Massachusetts
# 20,103:
5:56 pm PDT, Jun 30, Marisol Cartagena, Wisconsin
# 20,102:
4:16 pm PDT, Jun 30, Name not displayed, New York
# 20,101:
3:26 pm PDT, Jun 30, Gary Holm, Florida
we have the technology to eliminate the need for nuclear energy; let's ramp up the investment in solar, wind, and other alternative energies
Copyright © 2008 Care2.com, inc. and its licensors. All rights reserved